From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Nov 22 19:59:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2855314BE7 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:59:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA00247 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 04:59:01 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id EAA24249 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Tue, 23 Nov 1999 04:58:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from alpo.whistle.com (alpo.whistle.com [207.76.204.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BC9E15086 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:58:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@whistle.com) Received: from current1.whiste.com (current1.whistle.com [207.76.205.22]) by alpo.whistle.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA42358; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:57:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:57:56 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: Chuck Robey Cc: Nate Williams , "Daniel M. Eischen" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Chuck Robey wrote: > On Sat, 20 Nov 1999, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 20 Nov 1999, Nate Williams wrote: > > > > > > New calls must be able to return and say > > > > "hey it's not me returnuing, but actually a new KSE, " > > > > > > Not only that, but you need a way for it to be 'aborted' out and have it > > > cleanup as it goes. I suspect that this will require re-writing a large > > > number of syscalls with threading in mind, and leaving the 'old' calls > > > in place will allow more flexibility as things change. > > > > > > I could envision the 'old' calls going away at some point as the new > > > calls get completely fleshed out and tested, to be replaced with simple > > > wrappers for the threaded calls. > > > > > > > Maybe in the libraries, but we will need to keep the old syscalls in the > > kernel effectively forever. (for old binaries) It's not much of a cost.. > > (look at linux emulation). > > If I can ask one question, how will we cover things like errno, which > we'll want to be in thread-specific storage, but not on the stack (I > think)? > I think the usual errno hack is just fine.. we've already cleaned out other occurances of errno from a lot of code. #define errno (*threadspecific->errnum) or #define errno (errnum[thread_ID]) Actually there is no reason errno can't be on your local stack, in th einitial frame, as long as you have a way to reference it. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Chuck Robey | Interests include C programming, Electronics, > 213 Lakeside Dr. Apt. T-1 | communications, and signal processing. > Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic.mat.net: FreeBSD-current(i386) and > (301) 220-2114 | jaunt.mat.net : FreeBSD-current(Alpha) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message